CBO Credibility The First Victim Of Obamacare

Nancy Pelosi announced yesterday how pleased she was with the precision of the CBO report on the cost of Obamacare. It would be easy to laugh out loud if so much were not at stake.

Nancy Pelosi has no credibility to lose, so she did no harm to herself. The tactics Democrats have used as to CBO scoring of bills, however, has destroyed the CBO's credibility.

The CBO is supposed to be a neutral calculator of legislation. And it is. I have no doubt that the people at the CBO do their best to calculate the cost of a bill, given the assumptions the CBO is required to follow.

And that is the catch. Whereas on less politicized legislation there may be reasonable assumptions built into a bill and requested by those seeking a cost estimate, as to the health care bills proposed by Democrats it has been all games.

Completely unrealistice assumptions have been foisted upon the CBO, and the CBO has been required to score the bill with phony math.

Jeffrey Anderson at The Weekly Standard has a devastating take-down of the CBO report on the cost of the latest Democratic incarnation of the health care bill, CBO: Obamacare Would Cost Over $2 Trillion:

For a variety of reasons, this tally doesn’t remotely reflect the bill’s real ten-year costs. First, it includes 2010 as the initial year. As most people are well aware, 2010 has now been underway for some time. Therefore, the CBO would normally count 2011 as the first year of its analysis, just as it counted 2010 as the first year when analyzing the initial House health bill in the middle of 2009. But under strict instructions from Democratic leaders, and over strong objections from Republicans, the CBO dutifully scored 2010 as the first year of the latest version of Obamacare. If the clock were started in 2011, the first full year that the bill could possibly be in effect, the CBO says that the bill’s ten-year costs would be $1.2 trillion.

There is more, much more. Read the full article.

The CBO report amounts to a fraud perpetrated not by the CBO, but by the Democrats who forced the CBO to play these games.

Update: Michelle Malkin has more, The Deem-o-crats’ towering deception

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Union Teacher Hangs Obama In Effigy

Barack Obama backed the decision of the Central Falls School District in Rhode Island to fire all teachers at its underperforming high school, much to the anger of teachers' unions.

Now a teacher at the school has hung Obama in effigy:

Responding to a rumor that one of the terminated teachers at Central Falls High School had hung a doll representing President Obama in effigy in his classroom, school Supt. Frances Gallo went to the school after hours on Monday to investigate.

In a classroom on the second floor, she found the doll hanging upside down.

A spokeswoman for the Central Falls School Department said Gallo immediately removed the doll, reported the incident to "the appropriate authorities and the proper disciplinary actions have been taken," although no details of these steps were given, citing personnel reasons.

Gallo also declined to identify the teacher.

In a statement, Gallo said she would work to ensure incidents like this will not be repeated.

"This was an ill-conceived, imprudent act that has upset the lives of some of our students," Gallo said.[*]

Can you imagine the uproar if anyone associated with the Tea Party movement had done this. The screams of "racist" would be flooding the blogosphere, and the columnists at the NY Times would be wondering whether we were on the verge of violence.

*Note: The quote has been changed from the original post to reflect an updated report in the link.

--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
The Klan In Rhode Island? SPLC Exaggerates Again
Calling For Sparkman Apologies
Inevitable "Tea Party" and "Amy Bishop" Link Attempt

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Taking The Fight To The Life After

Tom Coburn (R-Okla) has signaled that any Congressman who flips from a "No" to a "Yes" vote on Obamacare should not expect a federal appointment after he or she gets voted out of office:

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., is putting wavering Democrats on advance notice: If President Obama is trying to reassure any of them of future federal employment in return for coming over to his side on health care, fuggedaboutit.

Coburn just told reporters he'll use his senatorial perogative to block the nominations of any lawmakers who change their votes from "no" to "yes" on health care should the president subsequently tap them for a federal post. Just in case any of them are considering that an option should things not work out for them in the November elections.

This is a message Congressmen, regardless of how they voted the first time, need to hear.

Anyone who votes for this bill needs to understand that they can and will be challenged after they leave office in whatever public position to which they aspire. They cannot expect a plum federal, state or local appointment without having to defend their vote.

If a Congressman wants leaves office for the private sector, good luck to them. I don't believe people should be challenged in their private lives the way some protesters have hounded former Bush administration officials.

But if Congressmen want to remain in public life after leaving office, then their vote for Obamacare should haunt them for the rest of their lives.

After all, we will be living with Obamacare for the rest of our lives, so it's only fair.

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

They Lied! (To Their Own Supporters)

Firedoglake has a great list (see images below) of Democratic Congressmen who pledged -- in writing -- not to vote for any health care bill which did not include a public option but who are voting for Obamacare which does not have a public option.

These Congressmen lied to their supporters. Think what they would do to their opponents.

--------------------------------------------

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Inconvenient Words In CBO Report

Now that Nancy Pelosi and company had all morning to spin the CBO report prior to its actual release, here is some language in the report you will not hear reflecting that the end result of the report is not certain at all (emphasis mine):

• "Although CBO completed a preliminary review of legislative language prior to its release, the agency has not thoroughly examined the reconciliation proposal to verify its consistency with the previous draft. This estimate is therefore preliminary, pending a review of the language of the reconciliation proposal, as well as further review and refinement of the budgetary projections." [In other words, we don't know if our estimates will comport with what actually ends up getting passed.]
  
  
• "CBO and JCT estimate that enacting both pieces of legislation—H.R. 3590 and the reconciliation proposal— would produce a net reduction in federal deficits of $138 billion over the 2010–2019 period as result of changes in direct spending and revenue (see the top panel of Table 1 and subtitle A of title II on Table 5). Approximately $85 billion of that reduction would be on-budget; other effects related to Social Security revenues and spending as well as spending by the U.S. Postal Service are classified as off-budget. CBO has not completed an estimate of the potential impact of the legislation on discretionary pending, which would be subject to future appropriation action." [In other words, the numbers include "off budget" gimmicks and assumptions about discretionary spending which may not be accurate, but we are required to include them when we do our estimates.]
  
  
• "Our analysis indicates that H.R. 3590, as passed by the Senate, would reduce federal budget deficits over the ensuing decade relative to those projected under current law—with a total effect during that decade that is in a broad range between one-quarter percent and one-half percent of gross domestic product (GDP). The imprecision of that calculation reflects the even greater degree of uncertainty that attends to it, compared with CBO’s 10-year budget estimates." [In other words, as uncertain as we are as to the first 10 years, we are totally guessing as to the second ten years.]

On this rests the survival of our democracy.

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

CBO - The Spin Starts Before The Report Released

Clever Democratic tactic.

Leak the supposedly positive, but contrived, aspects of the latest CBO report to favored bloggers, so that the news cycle is favorable: CBO Score On Health Care Bill Released: Boosts Democrats' Hopes Of Passing Reform, even though the report is not actually available as of this writing (emphasis mine):

Comprehensive health care reform will cost the federal government $940 billion over a ten-year period, but will increase revenue and cut other costs by a greater amount, leading to a reduction of $130 billion in the federal deficit over the same period, according to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office, a Democratic source tells HuffPost. It will cut the deficit by $1.2 trillion over the next ten years.

Hard for me to criticize the headline when the actual report is not yet posted at the CBO website, so I can't point out the phony assumptions CBO was forced to follow in their calculations.

Just another sign that this CBO score will be like the others, a contrived end result where it is critical to dig into the details to get the real story.

More evidence of the corrupt nature of this process.

Update 10:54 a.m. - CBO report still not posted on its website, yet the spinning is going full steam ahead.

Update 11:02 a.m. - Are we dealing with outright f-ing liars? (I know, rhetorical question.) Via HotAir, CBO apparently is denying it has completed its official cost estimate.

Update 11:30 a.m. - The report apparently has been released, but the CBO website is jammed. HotAir has it and quotes the usual "we really don't know what these numbers mean but we'll guesstimate them anyway" language (not a quote, my synopsis).

Here is a link to the report. Here's my review, Inconvenient Words In CBO Report

--------------------------------------------
Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Israel Is The New Honduras

Can't say I didn't warn you. The pressure tactics the Obama administration applied to Honduras -- such as the refusal to meet with high government officials -- now are being applied to Israel:

[I]n Jerusalem, prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu called his inner cabinet into its second session on the crisis that same night. The seven ministers were asked to review the situation after President Obama and secretary of state Hillary Clinton turned down their initial proposals for easing the upset and laid down three pre-conditions for restoring normal relations with Jerusalem:

1. The Netanyahu government must extend the 10-month freeze on West Bank settlement construction to include East Jerusalem;
2. When the moratorium runs out in September, it must be renewed for the duration of peace negotiations with the Palestinians;
3. Israeli must make more concessions to the Palestinian Authority and its chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

The Israeli government was informed that until those conditions were met,its ministers would not be received in Washington by high-level American officials - a virtual boycott, which downgrades the normal diplomatic, strategic and security exchanges between the two administrations to the level of senators and the special Middle East envoy George Mitchell.

As Robert Kagan pointed out in the Washington Post, there is something perverse about the Obama administration's foreign policy, which treats enemies like friends and friends like enemies.

The administration, which insists it cannot impose its will on others or dictate what others should do, does precisely that -- but only with allies.

As the administration is upgrading its ties with Syria -- which serves and has served for years as the transit point for terrorists who kill American soldiers -- the administration also is floating the pernicious story line that Israeli policies put American soldiers in danger.

My prediction: The "threat to American soldiers" tactic will be used as the excuse to force Israel to change its security and political policies, and maybe even its government, as we ignore the real threat to American soldiers coming from Syria and Iran, and their terrorist proxies.

The American people stood with Honduras in the face of morally and politically bankrupt Obama administration policies.

Given recent polling, which shows that Israel has a higher favorability rating among Americans than Obama, I am hopeful that the American people will stand with Israel in the face of Obama's misguided Middle East policies.

And as to Hillary Clinton, I say: Ever wonder why Obama gives you the job of beating up our allies?

Update: There is truth to viewing the Obama policy as one of strategic realignment away from Israel long advocated by the traditional Arabists in the State Department and current left-wing academics who populate and influence the current administration, resulting in A Middle East Without American Influence?:

The new catch phrase in the Middle East is strategic realignment. Broadly speaking, this means that the balance of power is shifting from the U.S.-backed regional order to the axis of resistance. Some commentators, like Robert Malley, have argued alongside the Syrians that the Obama administration should drop its old allies—the sick horse—for new friends among the axis of resistance. From a certain perspective, it appears that the White House has done just that, albeit unintentionally.

-------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Chicago Comes to Honduras
I Hope Obama Fails In Honduras
Obama Throws Venezuelans Under The Bus
He Who Cannot Stop Talking, Is Silent On Iran

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Will Obamacare Lead To A New "Anti-Fascist" Coalition?

Jane Hamsher of Firedoglake has been one of the few avowed progressives willing to speak out against Obamacare.

As I have explored before, Hamsher's central objection is my central objection, the mandate. We object to the mandate on very different grounds; she because it makes the government the bill collector for insurance companies, me because it alters the relationship between government and citizen by taxing and penalizing the failure to engage in economic activity.

Hamsher reacted to Dennis Kucinich's capitulation this morning by stating that Obamacare amounts to fascism:

The claims made by the administration about the virtues of the health care bill are outright fabrications. As Marcy Wheeler has documented in her post entitled “Health Care and the Road to Neufeudalism,” it does not control either insurance premiums or health care costs. Forcing 31 million people to buy a product they don’t want and can’t afford to use does not constitute health care reform. Once again, the poor get used as human shields so corporations can be the beneficiaries of massive government bailout.

Rather than actually helping the poor, this bill is a dangerous and unprecedented step on the road to domination of government by private corporate players who use it to suppress competition and secure their profits — the textbook definition of fascism.

Hamsher suggested that Obamacare will blur the lines between left and right as people reject the Obamacare system:

If indeed this bill passes, people across the country will have to start examining the basic assumptions with which we have heretofore approached politics. The thing I have learned above all else in this campaign is that the corporate control of government is much more extensive than I ever imagined, and the tools we have to fight its influence are ineffective.

We need to develop new partners in the fight, because there is tremendous public will to resist and the old ones can’t be trusted. We also need a new language to describe it, because the old “right-left” paradigm is firing past the true opponent.

The rejection of statism (whether corporate or otherwise) in favor of individual liberty and economic freedom is at the heart of the Tea Party movement and the changes taking place slowly in the Republican Party.

Perhaps it is time for Hamsher and those who blog with her to re-examine their derisive attitude towards the Tea Party movement.

We may not agree on desired outcome of what our health care system should look like, but we do agree that Obamacare represents the worst aspects of government control over society.

--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Get Rid of the Mandate
Taxing Your Mere Existence
IRS The New Health Care Enforcer

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

A Pathetic, Beaten Man

Dennis Kucinich at his press conference today announced he will vote "Yes" on health care legislation he detests and has criticized regularly for months.

Kucinich is a pathetic shadow of his former self, a man whose will to fight has been beaten out of him by the Democratic leadership, unions and netroots fundraisers.

A parable of how what is good for Obama has supplanted what is good for the country in the minds of Democrats.

Video via Politico:


--------------------------------------------
Related Post:
Will Kucinich Stand Tall or Small? UPDATE: Small

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Will Kucinich Stand Tall or Small? UPDATE: Small

At 10 a.m. this morning Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) has a press conference at which he will announce whether he will vote for or against Obamacare.

Until now, Kucinich has been a principled progressive. You may not agree with his principles, but at least like Jane Hamsher at Firedoglake, he has principles and votes that way.

That contrasts Kucinich with the bulk of the "progressive" wing of the Democratic Party, who have succumbed to power politics. Win one for the Won has replaced any semblance of principle as to the details of health care reform:

[O]n Monday, President Obama paid a personal visit to a senior citizens center in Mr. Kucinich’s district and gave Mr. Kucinich a lift on Air Force One to a health care rally in Strongsville, Ohio.

At the rally, someone in the crowd shouted, “Vote yes!”

Mr. Obama turned and asked Mr. Kucinich if he had heard the shout..

The unprincipled progressives, such as Markos Moulitsas, have threatened Kucinich with retribution by supporting a primary challenger if Kucinich doesn't support Obamacare.

Of the over 50 progressive Congressmen who pledged not to support any bill without a public option, Kucinich stands almost alone in openly holding to that principle.

Obama, Pelosi and Reid have succeeded in uniting principled conservatives and principled progressives against Obamacare, although for different reasons.

We know that there are many principled conservatives who are sticking to their principles; at 10 a.m. this morning we will find out if there are any principled progressives left.

Update: Kucinich stands small, announces he will vote for Obamacare. Kucinich justified his about face on the ground that Obamacare is an incremental step forward. Kucinich explained his prior votes against health care bills as based on principle. Kucinich said the President's visit to his district was decisive, and underscored "the urgency."

Kucinich said he is making a decision not on the bill as he would like to see it, but as it is. Kucinich said he does "not detract" from his prior criticisms. The bill is not a step towards anything he has supported in the end. "However, after careful discussions" with Obama and Pelosi, he will vote yes.

Just two days ago Kucinich wrote an op-ed for the Cleveland Plain Dealer in which he excoriated Obamacare:

Unfortunately, the president's plan, as it currently stands, leaves patients financially vulnerable to insurance companies. It requires all Americans to buy private health insurance policies, while failing to ensure those policies do what they are supposed to do -- protect people from financial catastrophe caused by injury or illness....

Unfortunately, if the president's plan becomes law without substantive change, you would still be only a major illness or injury away from personal bankruptcy, except the federal government will have required you to buy a private health insurance policy....

[T]he version of the bill that reached the House floor was considerably watered down. It had a severely weakened public option and the employee-retirement waiver had been stripped. It no longer constituted an incremental step forward that would provide relief to my constituents, so I could not support it. The version of the bill that passed the Senate was even worse.

Kucinich now will vote for a bill which is worse, in his own words just two days ago, than the House bill he voted against.

Obama has succeeded in destroying the last principled progressive.

--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
An Open Letter to Jane Hamsher
Uh Oh, Cats and Dogs Getting Along

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Sorry, I Must Stop Posting About Obama

Obama's name appears so frequently in my posts that internet marketers are beginning to confuse the two of us. I received the following e-mail solicitation at my blog e-mail address:

Hi Obama,

I am the Cisco WebEx Solutions Specialist responsible for supporting your area.

Are you available this week or next week for a brief discussion of your current business objectives?

I would like to share some creative ideas about how you can reduce expenses and increase productivity throughout your organization.

Please reply with the best time to reach you.

Best Regards,

Jeff

--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Has My Blog Strategy Failed?
New Year's Resolution: Beat Blogger Mood Disorder
Life Is Not Fair, And Neither Is Drudge

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Slaughtered By Self-Execution

Take your pick of the name to call the apparent Democratic Party plan to pass the Senate health care bill by not voting on it.

Democrats plan to use a procedure where a separate reconciliation bill, which would be subject to a vote, would contain language "deeming" the Senate bill passed.

Call it the Slaughter Solution (after the Congresswoman Louise Slaughter, D-NY) or the Self-Executing rule.

Either way, the use of such a procedural device on a bill this sweeping will call into question the legitimacy of the legislation (both constitutionally and politically).

David Axelrod challenged Republicans to "make my day" by running against the health care bill in the November elections.

We will not have to make Axelrod's day, because Democrats will have slaughtered themselves through self-execution.

Update: Many commenters are wondering about the constitutionality of the "Slaughter Solution." This Politico article has a good, plain-English explanation with quotations from law professors.

--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Absurdity Defined
The "All You Can Eat" Reconciliation Buffet
Pick Up The Phone

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Obama's Day of Rage In Jerusalem

The Obama administration has sent a signal to Palestinians of a new "get tough" U.S. attitude towards Israel.

As I wrote yesterday, the Obama administration is using the fact that an Israeli municipality announced building permits for Jews in a Jewish neighborhood of East Jerusalem as an excuse to alter the fundamental nature of the U.S.-Israeli relationship. The building permit, and the fact that it was announce in a diplomatic faux pas during Joe Biden's visit, were just the excuse for which the Obama administration has been waiting.

The risk I warned of was that the Obama administration's disproportionate actions would be interpreted by Palestinians as a green light to consummate their preexisting plans for violence in Jerusalem under the pretext of a supposed threat to the al-Aqsa mosque, and the start of a Third Intifada.

And so today the Palestinians have declared a Day of Rage over the al-Aqsa mosque and the building permits at the heart of the Obama administration's criticism.

The Obama administration does not seem to realize that in the Middle East perception quickly becomes reality.

While the desire to bring Israel down a couple of notches may satisfy the desire for revenge over the perceived snub of Joe Biden, reality in Jerusalem carries stones, firebombs and bomb vests.

--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Obama Adding Fuel To The Al-Aqsa Fire
Palestinian Hate Week Starts Tomorrow
Mr. Netanyahu, Tear Down That Wall For Our Suicide Bombers

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

What If You Threw A Coffee Party, And Mostly Middle-Aged White Males Showed Up?

AOL News followed the March 13 Coffee Parties, and here is what it found:

AOL News had correspondents at four of the gatherings -- in Bethalto, Ill. (a village near the Missouri border), the college town of Corvallis, Ore., Omaha, Neb., and Orlando, Fla. Their reports -- though obviously not a scientific sampling -- provide a composite portrait of the Coffee Party's early recruits....

Attendance: From a low of eight in Corvallis, Ore., to a high of 41 in Orlando.

Average Age: 48.45

Gender and Racial Breakdown: The crowds at the four events our correspondents attended were predominately white and roughly 60 percent male.

Look at the photos of the coffee parties, notice something (mostly) missing?

Does this reflect racial hostility? Absolutely not.

Why isn't MSNBC going crazy over the "white" crowds. Why isn't blogger SEK counting non-white faces?

Because the race card only works in one direction.

Update: Maybe the silence is because progressive bloggers have the same problem, just younger.

--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
Coffee Party Parasites
Race Card Player Has A Lot To Learn
Counting Non-White People At Palin Book Signings
How Do They Think This Stuff Up? Part 2

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook

Obama Adding Fuel To The Al-Aqsa Fire

Israel made a mistake in announcing an East Jerusalem building permit at the same time Joe Biden was visiting.

The building permit really is a non-issue since everyone knows the Ramat Shlomo section of Jerusalem never is going to be given to the Palestinians, but the optics looked bad, and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has apologized.

That should and could have been the end of it. But consistent with Obama's policy of beating up close allies, Obama is not letting the issue rest.

Obama has found his excuse to bring Israel to its knees, both on the peace process and the coming Iranian crisis.

Obama loaded up his foreign policy establishment with people who view Israel as the problem, and who look to taking Israel down a few notches as the key to our foreign policy. The foreign policy establishment has many sympathizers among the anti-"Israel lobby" crowd.

I agree with this HuffPo blogger to the extent that this Israeli diplomatic error is the excuse Obama has been waiting for:

Like a chess player patiently waiting for his opponent to make the first mistake, the U.S. administration has pounced on the opportunity to vent its anger with Israel. The public humiliation of Vice President Joe Biden during his visit in Israel was, apparently, the last straw.

But Obama is playing with regional fire by demanding as reparations for the diplomatic mistake that Israel, among other things, release hundreds of Palestinians arrested on securities charges, give territorial concessions which affect security, and ease the Gaza blockade which would allow Iran easier access to arms shipments.

Here is what the U.S. reportedly is demanding the Israelis do to end the diplomatic crisis with the U.S.:

Make a substantial gesture toward the Palestinians enabling the renewal of peace talks. The Americans suggested that hundreds of Palestinian prisoners be released, that the Israel Defense Forces withdraw from additional areas of the West Bank and transfer them to Palestinian control, that the siege of the Gaza Strip be eased and further roadblocks in the West Bank be removed.

Obama's desire to bring Israel down may spark another intifada, as Palestinians (both Hamas and the PA) are emboldened to consummate their plans to spark a crisis over false allegations that Israel plans to destoy the Al-Aqsa mosque:

Even though it was Israel who sparked the most recent crisis over Jerusalem, it is not the only player adding fuel to the fire. The behavior of the Obama administration - with senior officials trying to outdo each other in public reprimands of Israel - is reminiscent of the intentionally tough stance taken on the Netanyahu government a year ago. Nor are the Palestinians missing the opportunity to fan the flames.

True, the prime minister played into their hands on the matter of proposed construction in the Ramat Shlomo neighborhood, and Jerusalem's mayor is still at it, but the Palestinian Authority is playing a very dangerous game - perhaps the most dangerous of it all - over Jerusalem and specifically the Temple Mount.

Mohammed Dahlan, who is not known for his religious fervor, Khatem Abdel Kader, who holds the Jerusalem portfolio in Fatah, and others called Sunday on Israeli Arabs and residents of East Jerusalem to go to the Temple Mount today to "protect it from the Jews." A pamphlet Sunday issued a similar call; it was signed by the National and Islamic Forces, an organization that coordinated activities during the second intifada and in practice does not exist today

Obama and the bring-Israel-to-its-knees crowd risk taking a dangerous situation, and putting a spark to the powder keg.

--------------------------------------------
Related Posts:
"Heads They Win, Tails We Lose" Diplomacy
Little Nice To Say About The U.S.
He Who Cannot Stop Talking, Is Silent On Iran

Follow me on Twitter and Facebook